Been on a 'speed awareness' course? - here's where the course revenues (£140 million since 2010) are going..
Sophisticated digital devices, funded by motorists attending speed awareness courses, are replacing ageing film cameras which are coming to the end of their useful life.
More than half the safety partnerships are now installing new digital cameras, with the number set to increase by nearly 50 per cent in the next 12 months alone, The Daily Telegraph has disclosed.
The surge comes within months of the Government, which pledged to end the “war on the motorist” announcing that it was pushing up speeding fines from £60 to £90, a rise of 50 per cent.
On taking office the Coalition sought to mollify drivers by stopping Whitehall funding for speed cameras. In addition spending cuts led to others being switched off because partnerships could not to operate them.
But reports of the death of the camera have proved premature. Of the 33 partnerships who responded to inquiries from The Daily Telegraph, 21 confirmed that they were embarking on a comprehensive renewal programme over the next two to five years, while another six are still considering their next move.
The impact of the new digital cameras could be dramatic. Unlike the older machines, they never run out of film and can take pictures indefinitely.
Their running costs are lower, as police officers are not needed to collect and develop the film.
Instead the information from the camera is sent automatically to a control centre which, once the car has been identified from its number plate, can send out a notice of intended prosecution – the first stage towards fining motorists and putting points on their licence.
Four partnerships – Cheshire, Norfolk and Suffolk, Northants and Nottinghamshire – said they expected the number of prosecutions to increase.
Many cameras were switched off when the Coalition choked off funding after the election, others fell victim to the spending cuts which hit local government hard.
However the camera programme appears to have been rescued by the spread of speed awareness tests, which have been attended by 1.8 million motorists since January 2010.
While speeding fines, which were paid just under by 1 million drivers in England and Wales in 2010 go to the Treasury, fees for speed awareness courses are retained by police forces and safety partnerships.
It is this cash which is paying for the cameras.
The courses, currently made available by 41 forces across the country, cost from £70 to £97 – slightly more than the existing £60 fine.
But motorists who volunteer to take a course avoid three points on their licence.
They are currently offered to drivers who have not gone more than 10 per cent plus 9mph over the speed limit.
Exactly how many motorists are prosecuted will depend on the nature of the cameras being installed.
Fewer motorists tend to be prosecuted in areas with average speed cameras than those where traditional devices, which measure how fast motorists are going in one place.
This is because a higher proportion of drivers stick to the limit where average speed cameras are in place.
The return of the cameras was condemned by Keith Peat, spokesman for the Association of British Drivers and a former traffic police officer.
“This is entirely predictable. The fact of the matter is the road safety industry, which includes the manufacturers of the devices and the partnerships, have a vested interest.
“These cameras can’t see how an accident happened, they can’t see whether you were drunk or if you were careless.
“This Government is continuing the war on the motorist and it is counterproductive.”
However Stephen Hammond, the newly appointed transport minister, distanced the Government from the return of the speed cameras around the country.
“It is for local authorities and police to decide whether or not to use speed cameras and how they wish to operate them.
“However, we do not believe that cameras should be used as the default solution in reducing accidents, nor as a way of raising revenue.”
The updating of the cameras was defended by the country’s top traffic police officer, Dept. Chief Const. Suzette Davenport.
“Speed cameras are put in place to deter drivers from speeding and catch those who do. Drivers who are found breaking the law could be prosecuted and incur a criminal record,” she said.
“Using technology to make the roads safer for all drivers is an excellent example of police moving with the times.”
Using some of the money to get rid of pot holes would be nice, we say!
www.getgeared.co.uk
Sophisticated digital devices, funded by motorists attending speed awareness courses, are replacing ageing film cameras which are coming to the end of their useful life.
More than half the safety partnerships are now installing new digital cameras, with the number set to increase by nearly 50 per cent in the next 12 months alone, The Daily Telegraph has disclosed.
The surge comes within months of the Government, which pledged to end the “war on the motorist” announcing that it was pushing up speeding fines from £60 to £90, a rise of 50 per cent.
On taking office the Coalition sought to mollify drivers by stopping Whitehall funding for speed cameras. In addition spending cuts led to others being switched off because partnerships could not to operate them.
But reports of the death of the camera have proved premature. Of the 33 partnerships who responded to inquiries from The Daily Telegraph, 21 confirmed that they were embarking on a comprehensive renewal programme over the next two to five years, while another six are still considering their next move.
 |
| Watch out! There's a camera about... |
Their running costs are lower, as police officers are not needed to collect and develop the film.
Instead the information from the camera is sent automatically to a control centre which, once the car has been identified from its number plate, can send out a notice of intended prosecution – the first stage towards fining motorists and putting points on their licence.
Four partnerships – Cheshire, Norfolk and Suffolk, Northants and Nottinghamshire – said they expected the number of prosecutions to increase.
Many cameras were switched off when the Coalition choked off funding after the election, others fell victim to the spending cuts which hit local government hard.
However the camera programme appears to have been rescued by the spread of speed awareness tests, which have been attended by 1.8 million motorists since January 2010.
While speeding fines, which were paid just under by 1 million drivers in England and Wales in 2010 go to the Treasury, fees for speed awareness courses are retained by police forces and safety partnerships.
It is this cash which is paying for the cameras.
The courses, currently made available by 41 forces across the country, cost from £70 to £97 – slightly more than the existing £60 fine.
But motorists who volunteer to take a course avoid three points on their licence.
They are currently offered to drivers who have not gone more than 10 per cent plus 9mph over the speed limit.
Exactly how many motorists are prosecuted will depend on the nature of the cameras being installed.
Fewer motorists tend to be prosecuted in areas with average speed cameras than those where traditional devices, which measure how fast motorists are going in one place.
This is because a higher proportion of drivers stick to the limit where average speed cameras are in place.
The return of the cameras was condemned by Keith Peat, spokesman for the Association of British Drivers and a former traffic police officer.
 |
| Keith Peat, Assn. of British Drivers. Not a happy man. |
“These cameras can’t see how an accident happened, they can’t see whether you were drunk or if you were careless.
“This Government is continuing the war on the motorist and it is counterproductive.”
However Stephen Hammond, the newly appointed transport minister, distanced the Government from the return of the speed cameras around the country.
“It is for local authorities and police to decide whether or not to use speed cameras and how they wish to operate them.
“However, we do not believe that cameras should be used as the default solution in reducing accidents, nor as a way of raising revenue.”
The updating of the cameras was defended by the country’s top traffic police officer, Dept. Chief Const. Suzette Davenport.
 |
| Davenport: top traffic cop |
“Using technology to make the roads safer for all drivers is an excellent example of police moving with the times.”
Using some of the money to get rid of pot holes would be nice, we say!
www.getgeared.co.uk
